proving evolution as just a "theory"

[xianghua]

Yes.

why? chimps dont have this fusion. so it cant be evidence for a common descent. it can only be evidence for a fusion event in the human genome.

 

[pitabread]

Nice try. I'm human. Lizards aren't and neither are spiders. We didn't all come from the same thing.

Point is that the process you claim we can't observe is the very process that we observe today.

There is nothing innately different about the process of life reproducing today versus that process millions of years ago.

 

[USincognito]

the claim that human and banana shared a common descent is a belief. not a fact. so yes- basically evolution is a belief.

Well, except for all the evidence that animals and plants share a common ancestor. By the way, you're more closely related to Athlete's Foot Fungus than you are to rose bushes.

why? chimps dont have this fusion. so it cant be evidence for a common descent. it can only be evidence for a fusion event in the human genome.

I don't know why this is so hard to comprehend. The fusion occurred in the human lineage after speciation. That's why we observe that human chromosome 2 is a fusion of chimpanzee (and LCA ancstral) chromsomes 2a and 2b.

 

[pitabread]

the claim that human and banana shared a common descent is a belief. not a fact. so yes- basically evolution is a belief.

Evolution is a belief in the same manner that heliocentrism is a belief.

And incidently both have been denied by people for religious reasons with embarrassing consequences.

 

[TheBear]

Then you must have an answer to this question:
Why would a theist (a supernaturalist) subscribe to naturalistic (atheistic) ideas?

You might want to pose that question to all the theists, including most Christians, who identify as "theistic evolutionists". Then again, a very small brand of Christianity doesn't consider theistic evolutionists as "True Christians". Even if that's true, theistic evolutionists believe in a god/supernatural. Thus, they are still theists, not atheists.

Is any of this getting through???

 

[rjs330]

There is massive evidence that you did. You do not seem to have any evidence to the contrary.

There is no real evidence we did. You assume we did because you believe in evolution. You assume too much.

 

[rjs330]

Nice strawman. You don't seem to understand the predictions that exist out there. Theories are tested by predictions. They are predictions that properly cannot be answered at the time of formation.

For example it was known for quite some time that humans and other great apes have a different number of chromosome pairs. If the theory of evolution is correct then there should be evidence that there was a join in chromosome pairs to account for this. After we were able to sequence DNA the join was found.

There are countless examples of confirmed predictions in the theory of evolution. Creationists are afraid to even form a testable hypothesis of creationism. That is why there is no scientific evidence for creationism.

So we have theory that has been confirmed again and again versus a belief that has been shown to be wrong in many different ways. Which one would you go with?

What interesting the manipulation of evidence here. Man manipulates the evidence while true evolution is accidental. Suddenly we have "evidence". Once again prediction is based upon assumption and in many cases manipulation. What we have is a common design where God used certain methods and creative processes to make life. Genes are part of that. Again you don't know what is going to happen in a few billion years based upon the evolutionary process which is random and accidental. Taking a wild guess at what happened in the past is just that. It's assumptive.

 

[rjs330]

Indeed. Now all you have to do is to provide the "strong evidence" for creationism....easy, right?

Yes the evidence is all around you, but you don't see it because you are blinded by unbelief. It IS a matter of faith.

 

[rjs330]

Point is that the process you claim we can't observe is the very process that we observe today.

There is nothing innately different about the process of life reproducing today versus that process millions of years ago.

Except humans are creating humans and always have and always will. Same things with spiders and lizards.

 

[Cearbhall]

i am not sure. but even if we are talking about 1% percent, we may dealing with thousands of them. actually it doesnt matter at all, since science is base on evidences and not on surveys.

You're right. That's why evolution is a settled matter.

 

[USincognito]

There is no real evidence we did. You assume we did because you believe in evolution. You assume too much.

Ignorance of the evidence does not make it go away. And no, we don't "believe in" evolution. We know that it's a valid scientific proposition because of all the evidence supporting it.

 

[TheBear]

Again you don't know what is going to happen in a few billion years based upon the evolutionary process which is random and accidental. Taking a wild guess at what happened in the past is just that. It's assumptive.

Can you explain the predictions of annual flu shots, how they consistently work, and why they change every year ... especially in the light of the fact that it's all "random and accidental"?

 

[rjs330]

Can you explain the predictions of annual flu shots, how they consistently work, and why they change every year ... especially in the light of the fact that it's all "random and accidental"?

Well it's not based on evolution that's for sure.
Selecting Viruses for the Seasonal Influenza Vaccine| Seasonal Influenza (Flu) | CDC

 

[rjs330]

Ignorance of the evidence does not make it go away. And no, we don't "believe in" evolution. We know that it's a valid scientific proposition because of all the evidence supporting it.

Sorry but all the evidence is assumptive and speculative. There is no real evidence of evolution from a common ancestor. Its because we can't test it or observe it. We can speculate what might have been but the speculation in evolution is based only on assumption and no real evolutionary data because we don't have any way of observing or testing. Why? Because by evolutions own standards it's random and takes millions of years to happen.

It's a belief system because you can't reproduce, test or observe it.

 

[TheBear]

Well it's not based on evolution that's for sure.
Selecting Viruses for the Seasonal Influenza Vaccine| Seasonal Influenza (Flu) | CDC

Did you even read the CDC article you cited, or did you just go with the title and say to yourself - "Ah. 'Selecting viruses'. Therefore, nothing to do with evolution."? Did you really do that???

 

[Allandavid]

why? chimps dont have this fusion. so it cant be evidence for a common descent. it can only be evidence for a fusion event in the human genome.

Oh my....

In order for the theory of common descent to 'work' in the case of two so closely related species, the theory would have to explain why one of these species (chimpanzees) has one more chromosome than the other.

And it does! We are able to observe the fusion of two chromosomes at the site of human chromosome 2. Prior to this fusion, there would have been an additional one. The theory holds...

 

[Allandavid]

Yes the evidence is all around you, but you don't see it because you are blinded by unbelief. It IS a matter of faith.

"Look.....the trees!" is not evidence....

 

[USincognito]

Sorry but all the evidence is assumptive and speculative.

And I am sorry to tell you that using magic words like "assumptions" and "speculations" to try and poof away the evidence in a cloud of smoke doesn't work. The evidence remains and remains unaddressed.

{snip}

It's a belief system because you can't reproduce, test or observe it.

This crime against semantics is laughable.

 

[Wakalix]

Yes the evidence is all around you, but you don't see it because you are blinded by unbelief. It IS a matter of faith.

"We have evidence!"
"What evidence?"
"We have loads of it! Evidence coming out the wazoo! Evidence spilling out our doors!"
"Yes, but what evidence?"
"You just don't see it because you don't want to see it."
What evidence? It's not enough to say that you have evidence; you have to actually present the evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is no real evidence we did. You assume we did because you believe in evolution. You assume too much.

Sorry, but as usual you are demonstrably wrong.

By the way why would you make such an obviously false statement? You do not appear to understand what it means when you say something like this in regards to the Ninth Commandment.

Why not try to learn what is and what is not evidence?